Sterically Congested Adamantylnaphthalene Quinone Methides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Five new (2-adamantyl)naphthol derivatives (5-9, quinone methide precursors, QMP) were synthesized and their photochemical reactivity was investigated by preparative photolyses, fluorescence spectroscopy, and laser flash photolysis (LFP). Excitation of QMP 5 to S(1) leads to efficient excited state intramolecular proton transfer (ESIPT) coupled with dehydration, giving quinone methide QM5 which was characterized by LFP (in CH(3)CN-H(2)O, λ(max) = 370 nm, τ = 0.19 ms). On irradiation of QMP 5 in CH(3)OH-H(2)O (4:1), the quantum yield of methanolysis is Φ = 0.70. Excitation of naphthols QMP 6-8 to S(1) in CH(3)CN leads to photoionization and formation of naphthoxyl radicals. In a protic solvent, QMP 6-8 undergo solvent-assisted PT giving QM6 or zwitterion QM8 that react with nucleophiles delivering adducts, but with a significantly lower quantum efficiency. QMP 9 in a protic solvent undergoes two competitive processes, photosolvolysis via QM9 and solvent-assisted PT to carbon atom of the naphthalene giving zwitterion. QM9 has been characterized by LFP (in CH(3)CN-H(2)O, λ(max) > 600 nm, τ = 0.9 ms). In addition to photogenerated QMs, two stable naphthalene QMs, QM10 and QM11 were synthesized thermally and characterized by X-ray crystallography. QM10 and QM11 do not react with H(2)O but undergo acid-catalyzed fragmentation or rearrangement. Antiproliferative activity of 5-9 was investigated on three human cancer cell lines. Exposure of MCF-7 cells treated with 5 to 300 nm irradiation leads to an enhanced antiproliferative effect, in accordance with the activity being due to the formation of QM5.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".